Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Only If... (Score 1) 547

Sure, but only if all law enforcement officers are required to use the same tech on their firearms. Afterall, they're one of the groups most likely to be shot with their own firearm, so if this safety tech is so importatn, they should be the first to get it.

What's that? They're not ready to stake their lives on it working right in an emergency? Then neither am I.

Comment: Re:It's the Lack of Story (Score 1) 523

The fall of Arthas has been the main story arc of since the Warcraft III. With the death of the lich king, that arc is not done. And yes, Deathwing was a character in Warcraft II, but they were nothing like the one in Cataclysm, who was really a "giant space flea from nowhere" character. And the rest of the plot was a swiss cheese mess. The king of the water elementals gets kidnapped and because the dungeon resolving that plotlin got cut, it's like he fell out of the game through a trap door, because no one ever mentions him again. There's all these plot hooks for an ancient god they never bothered to implement. And the different areas of the game are so disjointed they literally couldn't come up with anything better than your character hanging around in the capital looking for "Help Wanted" ads on a bulletin board to get you from one zone to the next.

Comment: It's the Lack of Story (Score 1) 523

It's painfully obvious that "Wrath of the Lich King" was the end of the story the original creators set out to tell. They've all moved on, and the replacements are just making crap up based on focus groups, rather than trying to create an interesting narrative. For the players that don't care about the story at all, this doesn't really matter, but the ones who did are likely moving on to games more interested in an artistic expression than in just monetizing a dead horse IP.

Comment: Re:Shock news: first Amendment has limits too (Score 4, Informative) 496

by Stormy Dragon (#43679749) Attached to: DoD Descends On DEFCAD

See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution [wikipedia.org] and scroll down to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes who formulated the clear and present danger test for free speech cases.

You do realize the "clear and present danger" test was originally created to justify jailing people for protesting against WWI, right? If George W. Bush had arrested everyone who protested the Iraq War, would you have been fine with that?

Thankfully, Schenck v. United States was overruled by Brandenburg v. Ohio, in favor of the imminent lawless action test, although that doesn't stop ignorant people who think watching a few episodes of Law & Order makes them constitutional scholars from bringing it up over and over.

Comment: Depends... (Score 1) 329

by Stormy Dragon (#43624513) Attached to: Is Buying an Extended Warranty Ever a Good Idea?

If you can afford to replace the device being covered, than they don't make sense. If you can't afford to replace the device, then it may be worth it, because even if it's a losing money proposition on average, it's worth it for the security of not having an unlikely event wipe you out.

That is, I don't have an extended warranty for my computer, because if it dies unexpectedly I can afford to get a new one right away. I do have an extended warranty for my car because if the engine dies unexpectedly that would be a huge financial problem for me.

Comment: Re:I must be stupid (Score 2) 255

by Stormy Dragon (#43595933) Attached to: Does Antimatter Fall Up?

Inertial Mass comes from Newton's second law:

F = m_i * a

That is, inertial mass determines how much an object will be accelerated by a particular force.

Gravitational Mass comed from Newton's law of graviation:

F = G * m_g1 * mg2 / r ^2

That is, the magnitude of the gravitational forces between two objects.

The question is whether the two definitions of mass are interchangable (e.g. does m_i = m_g1?). That appears to be the case for normal matter, which we can tell because all objects accelrate at the same rate in a given gravitational field regardless of mass. But it doesn't have to be the case.

Comment: Re:Blanks. Fill them in. (Score 1) 291

by Stormy Dragon (#43483361) Attached to: Bitfloor Indefinitely Suspends Bitcoin Trading

Just because an investor ends up losing money, that doesn't mean it's a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme requires fraud where the money coming in is being used to pay out older investors rather than being used to purchase claimed assets. If the assets are purchased but become worthless that's not a Ponzi scheme. People who invested money in Hostess lost it when they went bankrupt. That doesn't mean Twinkies were a Ponzi scheme.

Someone is speaking well of you. How unusual!

Working...